Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Energy Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Geothermal characterization bill advances despite strong community opposition

Senate · February 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB 3081, a measure to fund characterization of underground energy resources including geothermal, advanced with amendments. The measure drew sustained, emotional opposition from community members who urged the committee to reject geothermal development, citing health, cultural and environmental concerns; supporters described the bill as an administrative step toward energy self-sufficiency.

Senate Bill 3081 would fund work to characterize the potential for underground energy resources statewide, an item that includes geothermal resource characterization.

Administration witnesses, including Mark Glick of the State Energy Office, described the bill as administrative and supportive of state energy self‑sufficiency. By contrast, a series of community testifiers — including Sarah Steiner, Jasmine Steiner and representatives of Truth for the People and local grassroots organizations — urged the committees to oppose the bill. Testimony detailed concerns about geothermal’s environmental and health harms (hydrogen sulfide exposure), the scale of drilling operations, and cultural impacts to sacred sites. One witness said prior geothermal efforts had failed and warned against repeating past mistakes; another cited ongoing litigation and community injunctions related to geothermal operations.

Committee chairs said they would pass SB 3081 with amendments, blank out the appropriation for Ways and Means to consider, and include a note in the committee report about a possible $6 million appropriation for consideration. Senators recorded reservations; the committee adopted the recommendation to pass with amendments.

The transcript records impassioned public testimony and detailed claims about health impacts and permitting history; those claims are recorded as testimony and were not adjudicated on the committee floor during the hearing.